With pleasure. You bracket your code with a [source] and a [/source] tag. This both disables HTML/forum code parsing and provides (C++) syntax highlighting.
You can also have [quote][/quote] blocks (like <blockquote> tags) and [code][code] blocks for in-line preformatted (like a <pre> or <code> tag) text.
[edited by - Fruny on May 9, 2004 8:39:05 PM]
I can program in C, but i can't use forums :)
thanx a lot! it's always nice to read "clean" posts!
now I have tryed it out and I'm all happy
[edited by - Qrikko on May 9, 2004 8:46:23 PM]
now I have tryed it out and I'm all happy
[edited by - Qrikko on May 9, 2004 8:46:23 PM]
In general, you sould only post pictures if YOU are hosting them on your web site. Other web-sites are generally unhappy when people start leaching their bandwidth by cross-linking pictures. If you do not own the web-space your pictures are comming from, those pictures could be removed/change at any time.
BTW, heres the corrected link...
[edited by - Onemind on May 9, 2004 9:14:25 PM]
BTW, heres the corrected link...
<img src = "http://www-mugc.cc.monash.edu.au/~pwwit1/screen.jpg"></img> [edited by - Onemind on May 9, 2004 9:14:25 PM]
IMG is a has no closing tag! The proper syntax is:
Man, you guys suck!
<img src="location" [width="w" height="h" ...] /> Man, you guys suck!
Uh... HTML doesn''t like it, but XHTML should accept the <img></img> form just fine. XHTML is based off XML, where the <blah /> syntax is simply shorthand permitted for an empty element. In fact, if I understood all that horribly dense text the W3C writes last time I read it, using <img /> shouldn''t be valid in old-school HTML, and is relying on the tolerance of the browsers'' parsers (though pretty much all of them will let you get away with it). Sadly you just can''t validate against both specs.
Oh, and the ''alt'' attribute is supposed to be mandatory for the img tag, for either spec.
Oh, and the ''alt'' attribute is supposed to be mandatory for the img tag, for either spec.
Arghh... Backspace should NOT be used as "navigate back"... just lost my post.. Anyone know how to remove that "feature"?
It was basically what Zahlman said + that since the pages don''t use XHTML there''s no need to use <img .... />. It''s valid in html 4.01 transitional, but not in html 4.01 strict, and since it''s not necessary here it''ll only add confusion .
Here''s a link with info about compability..
It was basically what Zahlman said + that since the pages don''t use XHTML there''s no need to use <img .... />. It''s valid in html 4.01 transitional, but not in html 4.01 strict, and since it''s not necessary here it''ll only add confusion .
Here''s a link with info about compability..
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
